You can position a redesign as an evolution, but if people no longer recognise the brand, it becomes a revolution — and not always a welcome one. The reverse is also true: a bold redesign can still feel like a natural step, as long as it aligns with expectations.

That gap between intention and perception is where most rebrands fail.

Not every brand has the same freedom to change. Brands built on creativity and disruption can move faster and further; their audience expects movement. More traditional brands operate differently: consistency is often their strongest asset.

That’s why brands like Coca-Cola evolve carefully and incrementally, while Pepsi can take more visible steps in its identity. Both approaches work because they are aligned with what their audiences expect.

And never forget that there is a difference between changing the branding and changing the packaging design. Doing both at the same time is more challenging than changing only one of them. But in my experience, doing neither over time can be even worse — especially in a rapidly changing environment with increasing consumer expectations for novelty.

And when making a change always ask yourself if you want consumers to notice the change or not.

Did people notice that the Danone branding disappeared from Oikos packaging? Probably not. And did you see that they did the same for the Activia and Danette ranges, but later changed their minds and put it back? Probably not.

That’s why Coca-Cola can temporarily change its name to “Marie”, for example, without disturbing customers. But the green Coca-Cola Life design was more difficult to accept and was eventually delisted.

The Dilea rebranding and packaging redesign were well accepted by consumers, partly because the marketing and design teams understood that the existing identity was outdated and that consumers were expecting change. The transition was also supported by teasers and on-pack communication to make it smoother and avoid losing customers who might perceive a change in taste and/or price.

Another well-known example is the Bahlsen redesign. A traditional brand attempted to modernise its image in a way that didn’t match how consumers perceived it. The result wasn’t seen as progress, but as a disconnect. One of the main issues was the use of an Italian design agency to rebrand a traditional German brand generating around 50% of its global sales in its domestic market. Do Italians really understand German consumers who have grown up with the more than 100-year-old Bahlsen brand?

For decision-makers, the question isn’t whether to evolve or revolutionise. It’s whether the change is credible.

Three questions to keep in mind:

• What do your consumers expect from your brand and packaging design today?
• How far can you stretch without losing recognition?
• Are you changing the brand positioning, or just how it looks?

And don’t underestimate the value of an agency that can guide you through the transition — especially one that understands the retail environment, the culture, and consumer habits, because it has likely learned through extensive trial and error.